Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Former HMAS Albatross firefighter Colin Stubbs, who worked at the navy base for 30 years both as a defence member and contractor, has again led the call for mandatory blood testing for all military personnel who may have been exposed to firefighting foams.
Mr Stubbs was among the crowd at a defence and state government community meeting last Wednesday, which revealed preliminary testing into possible contamination by the historical use of firefighting foams at the naval base showed the chemicals have been discovered in 17 locations off the base.
Contractor Aurecon’s report stated of 22 samples taken off base in the initial testing, 17 had had PFAS detected, which are a group of chemicals that include perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), which were commonly used in firefighting foams.
Despite the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) saying the risk to surrounding residents “appears low” and would be “reviewed when further sampling was completed” Mr Stubbs wants former personnel who were exposed to vast quantities of the chemicals to get blood testing.
Mr Stubbs, who now has an immune problem, said firefighters often ingested the chemicals and were covered in the foams.
“Even though they say there is only a low risk, you still would like to know,” he said.
“I understand a lot of people have small levels of the chemicals in their body but I would like to see my levels compared to them. That would satisfy my curiosity.
“I’m concerned not just with cancer but other diseases that are coming out now in reports worldwide regarding the foam.”
He has concerns about his health and that of his fellow firefighters.
“I’m in contact with a number of former colleagues and we have had a few die from cancer. What triggers that? Who knows. Whether it was chemicals we used in firefighting foams or the chemicals we actually put on the fires to burn,” he said.
“We had no OHS. We dealt with a lot of chemicals with bare skin. We didn’t have breathing apparatus when we fought fires back in the ’70s and ’80s, so we breathed all this toxic stuff in.
“There are studies worldwide that are finding people are getting cancer and having problems.
“Even though they say it is low concern and has been around since the ’50s and yes it’s in products such as cookware etc, it isn’t the liquid form that you can swallow. Unless you swallow a frypan and good luck with that.
“This was a liquid foam that got into everything. They say this stuff is around your house. If that was the case we’d have millions dead.
“At least firefighters are now covered for cancer treatment by the government.”
Senior medical advisor to the Department of Defence, Dr Matthew Klein dismissed Mr Stubbs’ concerns.
“The most recent studies show there is no evidence it causes cancer at all,” he said.
“We are waiting for the Department of Health to decide what the blood testing will look like. The Coalition committed to blood testing if re-elected.
“A defence program would mirror the program for the people off-site. People with similar exposure.
“We get asked about historical exposure, those exposed in the past.
“The difference between the environment and the human body is the human body actually eliminates these chemicals. So doing blood testing for chemicals that you were exposed to 10-15-20 years ago doesn’t give you additional information.”
He said people had lots of exposure via the skin but there was minimal risk of contamination through the skin.
“For a blood testing program for historical usage we have to look if there is a significant risk group or the people,” he said.
“You have to look at the length of time from the exposure.
“It’s important to know, blood tests don’t give you a level of risk. They don’t actually lead to giving answers to what sort of medical management.
“The most recent studies show there is no evidence it causes cancer at all.
“It is a matter of working out when you had the exposure, what those exposures were, whether it got into your mouth, whether you swallowed any of it but certainly skin contact is very minimal risk.”
Mr Stubbs agreed Oakey and Williamtown had different areas of concern.
“It will be interesting to see what they’ll find here in deeper testing,” he said.
““The watercourses around here are different. Because Albatross is on the top of a hill it’s not like the other two bases that are on the flat. There the water lays around on a lot.
“When you get a lot of of heavy rain here it runs off very quickly. As far as water sources, unless you go very deep to get it, they are not going to find a lot.”